1 CGHC010334972026 2026:CGHC:42525 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8026 of 2026 Amin Akbar Sheikh Kaif S/o Shri Akbar Sheikh Aged About 22 Years R/o Kaikadagli, Bhingar Nagar, P.S.- Bhingar Champ, Ahmad Nagar, (Maharastra) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Singhoda, (Saraipali), District- Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Respondent MCRC No. 8143 of 2026 Shahrukh Alam Sheikh S/o Alam Sheikh Aged About 30 Years R/o Panam Lakangala, Nagar Devle, P. S. Bhimgar, Camp Amhad Nagar Maharashtra, --- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund C. G. --- Respondent For Applicants : Shri Dheerendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Deputy Advocate General ( HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY ) Order on Board 30/09/2026 1. Since both the bail applications arise out of same Crime No.87/2023, therefore, they are heard, clubbed together and disposed of by common order. Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.10.01 11:14:37 +0530 2 2. The applicants have preferred these Second Bail Applications under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.87/2023, registered at Police Station Singhoda, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20 (b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act). First Bail Application of the applicant – Amin Akbar Sheikh was rejected vide order dated 11.01.2024 passed in MCRC No. 25 of 2024 whereas vide order dated 17.06.2026 passed in MCRC No.5260/2026 preferred by applicant – Sharukh Alam Sheikh was also rejected. 3. Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 27.10.2023 at about 08:30 pm, upon receiving secret information from an informer, the S.H.O. Singhoda intercepted a Toyota Innova bearing registration No. MH-12-CY-4778 on N.H.53 near village Rehtikhol, Saraipali, District Mahasamund. During search of the said vehicle, about 40 kilograms of contraband cannabis (ganja) was allegedly recovered from the joint possession of the present applicants and co-accused persons. Based on these allegations, the aforesaid offence was registered against the present applicant. Hence, these applications. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that from joint possession of the present applicants and co-accused person, namely, Kamran Arif Sheikh, 40 kilograms of ganja was seized by the police on 27.10.2023. He would submit that after rejection of the bail application, co-accused Kamran Arif Sheikh filed an S.L.P. (Criminal No. 11668/2026 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the same has been allowed vide order dated 17.08.2026. It is contended that on the 3 ground of parity, the applicants are entitled for grant of bail. It is further submitted that they have no criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 27.10.2023. He would further submit that conclusion of trial may take some considerable time. He, therefore, prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail applications. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the fact that from the joint possession of the applicants and co-accused persons, 40 kilograms of ganja was seized and co- accused – Kamran Arif Sheikh has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 17.08.2026 passed in S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 11668/2026, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicants. Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed. 8. Let the applicants be released on bail on each of them furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; 4 (ii) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Anjani